3 ms·

Climate scientist faces sack for refusing to fly to Germany from Solomon Islands

adastra22 3y ago
Spending 2-3 months on travel, on the institute's dime, on some stupid principle. Then makes a shitstorm about it on twitter. If I was his boss, he'd be sacked yesterday. Zero sympathy.
- shortcake27 3y ago
  Why is the principle stupid? He’s a climate scientist and flying is terrible for the environment. IMHO “stupid” is when people fly private jets to climate summits.
  - adastra22 3y ago
    He has accumulated a tremendous amount of knowledge in his field. He represents an investment society has made into understanding climate science, and potentially doing something about it. Though as a scientist I doubt he is highly paid, his contribution to society, to his company, and the future of the human race is measured is measured in more than mere euros. Yet despite all that, and despite his presence in Germany being urgently needed, he decides to throw a tantrum on Twitter over a single plane flight, and deny his knowledge from being available for 2-3 months of time. Completely self-centered and ridiculous.
    - defrost 3y ago
      > and despite his presence in Germany being urgently needed For what? What disaster will occur should he not arrive back when he was supposed to (a month ago on the 10th of September). I'm guessing he has a laptop and internet access.
  - joegibbs 3y ago
    But what about the opportunity cost of the time that he would use travelling by boat? Surely if he’s a top climate scientist he’s doing more hypothetical damage to the planet by not being on the job for three months than he would save by not polluting a few tons of CO2.
    - shortcake27 3y ago
      Where’s the assumption that he won’t be on the job coming from? What work would he be doing at his desk in Germany that he wouldn’t be able to do remotely?
  - alpaca128 3y ago
    Travelling for two months on ships (which aren't exactly great for the environment either) and public transportation is a bit much. Perhaps it's not that bad considering he might be able to use the time for remote work, but it's absolutely understandable the employer doesn't agree those 3-4 tons of estimated CO2 savings are worth it. Travelling to climate summits and other things that could be done via video calls is ridiculous, as is flying between two neighbouring cities because it's subsidized to a point it's cheaper than using a car. But there will always be cases where flying is just the most reasonable choice. Here it's the choice between 6 months field research + 2 flights or 10 months away from the desk and no flights.
    - stop50 3y ago
      the ships would blast the same amount of pollution in the air without him.
      - adastra22 3y ago
        The airplanes too.
defrost 3y ago
For those that enjoy a shallow geography rabbit hole, he refused to fly back from an island in the Solomon Islands archipelago NOT from an island that was part of the Solomon Islands. Bonus material from the next archipelago along that chain to the south east: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRIUbB8Cie4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRIUbB8Cie4
nonrandomstring 3y ago
Lions led by donkeys. Little of value comes from universities run by bureaucrats and petty administrators whose microscopic world-view is "helping to solve" global problems by balancing budgets and enforcing HR rules and procedural policies. Bracketing out any (only too human) bitter jealousy and hostility toward eggheads and boffins who swan-off to sunny islands on field work... there's a profound mismatch of perspective going on. If that university had one iota of good sense they'd be singing the praises of this researcher in a massive PR drive around research integrity. But the head and the ass are not wired together.

Spending 2-3 months on travel, on the institute's dime, on some stupid principle. Then makes a shitstorm about it on twitter. If I was his boss, he'd be sacked yesterday. Zero sympathy.

shortcake27 3y ago
Why is the principle stupid? He’s a climate scientist and flying is terrible for the environment. IMHO “stupid” is when people fly private jets to climate summits.
- adastra22 3y ago
  He has accumulated a tremendous amount of knowledge in his field. He represents an investment society has made into understanding climate science, and potentially doing something about it. Though as a scientist I doubt he is highly paid, his contribution to society, to his company, and the future of the human race is measured is measured in more than mere euros. Yet despite all that, and despite his presence in Germany being urgently needed, he decides to throw a tantrum on Twitter over a single plane flight, and deny his knowledge from being available for 2-3 months of time. Completely self-centered and ridiculous.
  - defrost 3y ago
    > and despite his presence in Germany being urgently needed For what? What disaster will occur should he not arrive back when he was supposed to (a month ago on the 10th of September). I'm guessing he has a laptop and internet access.
- joegibbs 3y ago
  But what about the opportunity cost of the time that he would use travelling by boat? Surely if he’s a top climate scientist he’s doing more hypothetical damage to the planet by not being on the job for three months than he would save by not polluting a few tons of CO2.
  - shortcake27 3y ago
    Where’s the assumption that he won’t be on the job coming from? What work would he be doing at his desk in Germany that he wouldn’t be able to do remotely?
- alpaca128 3y ago
  Travelling for two months on ships (which aren't exactly great for the environment either) and public transportation is a bit much. Perhaps it's not that bad considering he might be able to use the time for remote work, but it's absolutely understandable the employer doesn't agree those 3-4 tons of estimated CO2 savings are worth it. Travelling to climate summits and other things that could be done via video calls is ridiculous, as is flying between two neighbouring cities because it's subsidized to a point it's cheaper than using a car. But there will always be cases where flying is just the most reasonable choice. Here it's the choice between 6 months field research + 2 flights or 10 months away from the desk and no flights.
  - stop50 3y ago
    the ships would blast the same amount of pollution in the air without him.
    - adastra22 3y ago
      The airplanes too.

defrost 3y ago

For those that enjoy a shallow geography rabbit hole, he refused to fly back from an island in the Solomon Islands archipelago NOT from an island that was part of the Solomon Islands. Bonus material from the next archipelago along that chain to the south east: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRIUbB8Cie4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRIUbB8Cie4

nonrandomstring 3y ago

Lions led by donkeys. Little of value comes from universities run by bureaucrats and petty administrators whose microscopic world-view is "helping to solve" global problems by balancing budgets and enforcing HR rules and procedural policies. Bracketing out any (only too human) bitter jealousy and hostility toward eggheads and boffins who swan-off to sunny islands on field work... there's a profound mismatch of perspective going on. If that university had one iota of good sense they'd be singing the praises of this researcher in a massive PR drive around research integrity. But the head and the ass are not wired together.